= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
linkhyrule5 comments on Introducing Familiar, a quantified reasoning assistant (feedback sought!) - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (40)
Ah. Well, (correlations enough-sleep true), for example, just gives me "That didn't work" - what am I doing wrong?
I'm not sure. If you're comfortable sharing your data, PM me a link to the contents of your /data folder.
I'd rather not, but I reproduced the problem with some sample data here.
It's just six days of "example1-6", and two predicates. example1 is a {0,1,2}, example2-4 are non-negative, example5-6 are boolean; example7 is defined as "example4 on day-1", example8 is defined as "example3 >= 20". I've filled them in so that example8 generally implies example1=2, and example6 implies example1=2, with one exception as noise (with example6 && example8 and example1=1).
Generates the same error.